Skip to main content
Glama
JONASXZB

mcp-minis

by JONASXZB
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_notes

Search your notes by full-text query across titles, content, and tags, ranking matches by relevance and returning previews so you find the right note without reading the whole vault.

Instructions

Full-text search the vault (title, content, and tags).

Args: query: Words to search for. Notes containing all words rank first (FTS5 relevance order). limit: Maximum number of notes to return (1-100, default 20). The result always reports the total number of matches, so a truncated list is never mistaken for the whole vault.

Returns: Matching notes with previews, best matches first — or a message saying nothing matched.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 20,
+  "title": "Limit",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses FTS5 relevance ranking, that notes containing all words rank first, the 1-100 limit cap, and that a truncated result still reports total match count. The remaining gap is only that read-only/safety semantics are implied by "search" rather than stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core verb+resource, then cleanly sectioned into Args and Returns with no wasted prose. The Returns section partially duplicates the existing output schema, which costs a little, but the total-match nuance justifies it.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers parameters, ranking, and truncation behavior adequately. Slightly more explicit sibling differentiation would make it fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: query is defined as words to search with all-words ranking behavior, and limit is given a range (1-100) and default (20) plus the truncation-reporting guarantee. This adds real meaning beyond the bare typed properties.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Full-text search the vault (title, content, and tags)" gives a specific verb and resource, and the scope of searched fields adds precision. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling list_notes, so the agent must infer that this tool is the query-driven one.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for finding notes by keyword. But no alternatives are named (e.g. list_notes vs search_notes) and there are no when-not-to-use conditions, leaving the routing decision to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools